Chemtrail Debunkers....

reply to post by jdub297

As AuroraGeo pointed out, to be effective such a program would require millions of flight and thousands of aircraft each year. Doesn't sound very effective to me in light of this common-sense observation.

That was something that caught my eye when I saw it. Funny how those who swear chemtrails are there seem to overlook this type of info.

The ignorance among all the debunkers is deafening.

The "PROPOSAL" was accepted and has been in the "RESEARCH" phase for years now.

Phase 2 began 18 months into the "RESEARCH" project.

Geoengineering: Governance and Technology Policy : January 10, 2011

www.fas.org...

Introduction
Climate change has received considerable policy attention in the past several years both
internationally and within the United States.

A major report released by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007 found widespread evidence of climate warming, and
many are concerned that climate change may be severe and rapid with potentially catastrophic
consequences for humans and the functioning of ecosystems.

The National Academies maintains
that the climate change challenge is unlikely to be solved with any single strategy or by the
people of any single country.
1
For more information on the policy issues associated with climate change, see CRS Report RL34513, Climate
Change: Current Issues and Policy Tools, by Jane A. Leggett; and CRS Report R40643, Greenhouse Gas Legislation:
Summary and Analysis of H.R. 2454 as Passed by the House of Representatives , coordinated by Mark Holt and Gene
Whitney.
2
See IPCC website at www.ipcc.ch...; and United Nations
Environment Programme, Climate Change Science Compendium 2009, 2009, www.unep.org...
ccScienceCompendium2009/cc_ScienceCompendium2009_full_highres_en.pdf.
3
The National Academies, Ecological Impacts of Climate Change, 2009, dels-old.nas.edu...
ecological_impacts.pdf.
4
H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (Waxman/Markey), and S. 1733, the Clean Energy
Jobs and American Power Act (Kerry/Boxer), were the primary energy and climate change legislative vehicles in the
111
th
Congress. For a comparison of key greenhouse gas emission control provisions in both the House and Senate, see
CRS Report R40556, Market-Based Greenhouse Gas Control: Selected Proposals in the 111
th
Congress, by Larry
Parker, Brent D. Yacobucci, and Jonathan L. Ramseur.
5
For more information on proposed climate change mitigation, see CRS Report R40236, Estimates of Carbon
Mitigation Potential from Agricultural and Forestry Activities, by Renée Johnson, Jonathan L. Ramseur, and Ross W.
Gorte.
6
For more information on proposed climate change adaptation measures, see CRS Report R40911, Comparison of
Climate Change Adaptation Provisions in S. 1733 and H.R. 2454, coordinated by Melissa D. Ho.
7
Alan Robock, “20 Reasons Why Geoengineering May Be a Bad Idea,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June
2008

 

Summary
In general, geoengineering technologies are categorized as either a carbon dioxide removal
(CDR) method or a solar radiation management (SRM) method. CDR methods address the
warming effects of greenhouse gases by removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere.
CDR methods include ocean fertilization, and carbon capture and sequestration. SRM methods
address climate change by increasing the reflectivity of the Earth’s atmosphere or surface.
Aerosol injection and space-based reflectors are examples of SRM methods. SRM methods do
not remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, but can be deployed faster with relatively
immediate global cooling results compared to CDR methods

 

Contents

Solar Radiation Management ..............................................................................................15
Enhanced Albedo (Surface and Cloud) ..........................................................................16
Aerosol Injection...........................................................................................................18
Space-Based Reflectors.................................................................................................19

 

Aerosol Injection
Aerosol injection is the dispersal of aerosols, such as hydrogen sulfide (H2S) or sulfur dioxide (SO2), into the stratosphere to direct solar radiation back toward space or absorb heat, thus cooling the Earth.
62
Military aircraft, artillery shells, or stratospheric balloons could be employed to inject the aerosols. The annual cost for sulfur particle injection using airplanes is calculated to be several billion dollars, depending on the amount, location, and type of sulfur particle injected into the stratosphere.
63
However, there has not been any testing to determine whether the theoretical predictions will match reality. Aerosol injection seeks to imitate large volcanic eruptions. Indeed, many studies have based aerosol injection simulations on data gathered and analyzed from the Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption in the Philippines in 1991, which led to a reduction in global temperatures, though not distributed evenly across regions.
64
Sulfur releases from volcanic eruptions are random, withcooling impacts that have lasted no more than a few years. Aerosol injection would probably have to occur several times over decades or centuries to offset radiative forcing caused by greenhouse gases due to the short effectiveness time frame of aerosol injection.
65
The benefits and risks of aerosol injection would not be evenly distributed around the globe. A potential benefit, in addition to cooling of the planet, could be reduced or reversed sea and land ice melting (as long as the aerosols don’t settle on and darken snow and ice).
66
Some risks could be drought in Africa and Asia leading to a loss in agricultural productivity, the GHG impact that would accumulate from transporting the aerosol to the site of injection, stratospheric ozone depletion, weakening of sunlight for solar power, a less blue sky, and obstruction of Earth-based optical astronomy

 

Conclusion
If the U.S. government opts to address geoengineering at the federal level, there are several
approaches that are immediately apparent. First, it may continue to leave geoengineering policy
development in the hands of federal agencies and states. Second, it might impose a temporary or permanent moratorium on geoengineering, or on particular geoengineering technologies, out of concern that its risks outweigh its benefits. Third, it might develop a national policy on geoengineering by authoring or amending laws. Fourth, it could work with the international community to craft an international approach to geoengineering by writing or amending international agreements. That the government can play a substantial role in the development of new technologies has been manifested in such areas as nanotechnology, nuclear science, and genetic engineering.

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
The ignorance among all the debunkers is deafening.

The "PROPOSAL" was accepted

Hmmm...and you don't bother to show a link supporting that statement.....??

You are not usually reticent about providing us with your "proof" - why not this time?

I suspect I know why.....but I'll give you a chance enlighten us.....

ALBEDO ENHANCEMENT BY STRATOSPHERIC SULFUR INJECTIONS

www.cogci.dk...

In conclusion: The first modelling results and the arguments presented in this paper call for active scientific research of the kind of geo-engineering, discussed in this paper. The issue has come to the forefront, because of the dilemma facing international policy makers, who are confronted with the task to clean up air pollution, while simultaneously keeping global climate warming under control.

Below is a report on Global warming. Some scientists have said ths is a best case scenario.
IPCC
Climate Change 2007 Synthesis Report
www.ipcc.ch...

fora.tv...
Dan Miller's presentation focuses on why the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) reports are actually best case scenarios

Mathius,

I'll repeat my earlier post to you on this thread.

You are living in a world of ignorance. These highlighted posts of yours...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

...only confirm to me that you simply haven't a clue. You might as well film a video, post it on You Tube and shout "Look, Chemtrails!" on it. If you are serious about dedicated research on the contrails that you are seeing then why not approach it from a different angle? Why not join an aviation enthusiast or Air Traffic Control monitoring forum of group? Apologies for going on about it but your knowledge of Air Traffic Control or even aviation related matters is clearly lacking. Fine if you want to remain ignorant, but if you want to have some credibility in your quest then basic knowledge of aviaion and Air Traffic Control is essential.

Thank you for providing a location from where you are viewing those 'chemtrails'.

Go onto the following website

skyvector.com...

Type KLAX into the 'Flight Plan box' and click 'go'

KLAX is the code for Los Angeles International Airport

From the top bar click on Enroute H-4. This will bring up the J and Q routes. This covers the high altitude routes in the location that you mentioned. Those routes cover the height 18,000 to 45,000 feet.

What you are viewing when you see contrails are in the main aircraft using those J and Q routes. Work it out for yourself via the cursor featuring the lat and long on the Flight Plan bar.

It is obvious that you are seeing aircraft using Q11, J6, J1, J5 and J50 high altitude routes. A major waypoint LANDO is also present in the area that you were viewing the contrails.

Aircraft in that region can also function above the high altitude routes. For example the WB-57 used by NASA and the U-2s operating out of Beale Air Force Base with the USAF. Take a look at the following website with the WB-57 producing a contrail at 55,000 feet. Note the reply from the WB-57 pilot?

www.skywise711.com...

www.airliners.net...

Link to video showing the WB-57 contrail as seen from the ground. It also includes the Flight Aware track.

www.disclose.tv...

So there you have the established facts. You are now aware of the high altitude routes and also that aircraft can and do operate above those routes. It is a busy area with aircraft also operating out of Palmdale, Edwards and Point Mugu that can utilise the airspace that you are viewing. Some military aircraft can utilise their capability to get above the busy airliner high altitude routes.

I notice that you are still making posts in reference to the contrail off California on 8th November 2010.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You made reference to UPS902. UPS902 is a clue to the question that I posed to you back in early March. If you had the aviaiton knowledge in the first place then it would be easy. See if you can work it out? What has UPS902 got in common with the aircraft seen in the following post?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

With your new found knowledge via Sky Vector you can now work out the high altitude air route that you can see in the US Capitol Building image.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

TJ

Seems to me there are mountains of evidence that confirm at the very least "field" testing is occuring. I shared in an earlier post my own observations seeing these things daily. I know what I am seeing are not normal contrails, and I know the difference. I saw a very interesting seminar recently on Geo-engineering and one of the scientists made a very interesting statement, basically saying that if geo-engineering methods fail he'll need to teach his children survival skills? The CFR has people in place to manage this program, so no big leap to assume this is already underway. For the sake of discussion lets say the scientists have determined that we are in eminent danger and this "sunscreen" as I've heard it called, is absolutely necessary, why the coverup? Something this big and this important that involves the Earth we all share should be discussed openly.

reply to post by tommyjo


You are free to believe what ever you want. If you choose to keep your ignorant views and make false remarks towards other people smarter than you then that is your choice. However, you don't fool me at all and I will continue too laugh at your kind and deny your ignorance.

reply to post by tommyjo

You are working awfully hard. It must be a thankless job.

And, you call people ignorant. tsk. tsk.

Make yourself useful. Help us to understand what is being "sprayed" There are too many of us. We know something is going on up there that is not normal. Either YOU realize that something is going on, or you don't. If you don't, you are just a roadblock to those of us that do.
If you think everything is normal, why don't you just go away? Why do you work so hard?

Let's talk about the possibilities, not the impossibilities.

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
Seems to me there are mountains of evidence that confirm at the very least "field" testing is occuring.

how come none of it can be produced then?

For the sake of discussion lets say the scientists have determined that we are in eminent danger and this "sunscreen" as I've heard it called, is absolutely necessary, why the coverup? Something this big and this important that involves the Earth we all share should be discussed openly.

It is being discussed - all those papers Matty keeps quoting are dicsussions as to how to counter global warming, will stratospheric "spraying" (for want of a better word) actually work? What will the side effeccdts be? How much would it cost? What are hte best methods to do it? what other things could be done to achieve the same effect?

it's ironic that Matty is presenting all this evidence that the topic is being taken very seriously, and very PUBLICALLY....and he says that's all evidence of a cover up!!

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by tommyjo

 

You are free to believe what ever you want. If you choose to keep your ignorant views and make false remarks towards other people smarter than you then that is your choice. However, you don't fool me at all and I will continue too laugh at your kind

and deny your ignorance.

edit on 31-3-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: (no reason given)

Mathius,
Seriously now, behave! It isn't my fault that you are caught up in this 'chemtrail hoax'. I dip into ATS now and again, but you appear to live on ATS 24/7 solely to debate it? It has obviously taken over your life and where has it got you? If you had come onto ATS and shown even basic aviation knowledge in your attempt to put your theory across it would have been a credible attempt. Unfortunately you have shown nothing but ignorance and it is just getting worse as it goes on.

All you have done is bombarded ATS with copy and paste articles without showing the aviation knowledge to go with it. Any time you have attempted to discuss aviation related subjects it ends up a train wreck. You then try and divert those blunders by posting more BS psuedo science articles. Wash rinse and repeat hoping that nobody will bring up the question again. You do this on every thread that you have created.

You claim to have 'seen it' for yourself, but you now won't even acknowledge the high altitude routes that are visible from the 'grapevine' in California? It is quite clear that you didn't know that such routes even existed? So who is showing the ignorance here? So will you just fudge the issues yet again or will you answer the questions posed to you?

TJ

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

....it's ironic that Matty is presenting all this evidence that the topic is being taken very seriously, and very PUBLICALLY....and he says that's all evidence of a cover up!!

Mathius probably thinks that the high altitude air routes have been 'created' since he started posting on ATS?
The Gooberment shills and disinfo agents have been working hard on this 'cover up'. What do you think he will post next? Will it be a Tanker Enemy video or perhaps a video of the chemtrails being generated from the 'rear wing set'?


TJ

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I disagree there is no evidence and I know what I'm seeing with my own eyes. Trust me when I say to you I wish this wasn't true, but the more I search for the truth the more evident it becomes to me this is no hoax.

Why the personal attacks against Mathias, clearly he has invested much time to investigating this issue, and I have learned alot from his research. His motives seem sincere to me.

Regardless of the attempts by debunkers to deny the obvious truth about stratospheric aerosol geoengineering. I feel that I have sufficiently found the answers I was seeking when beginning this debate. My efforts will be better spent focusing on other aspects surrounding this topic.

There is really no point in debating with people who refuse to open their eyes, who refuse to accept the truth and who ignore common sense. If the aviation industry is that desperate to hide it's involvement with this project, then so be it. The ignorance of those who attempt to suppress the issues from being openly discussed in an honest manner will be the cause of their own downfall.

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

I disagree there is no evidence

Well where is it then?

and I know what I'm seeing with my own eyes.

How can you tell a contrail from a chemtrail by sight?

Why the personal attacks against Mathias, clearly he has invested much time to investigating this issue, and I have learned alot from his research. His motives seem sincere to me.

My "attacks" on Matty are fairly tame compared to his on people who like to see credible evidende - just have a look at his last post for a broad brush condemnation of anyone who disagrees with him.

I have no idea of his motives....but his "evidence" simply fails to stack up to what he claims it does.

It is not an attack on someone to say that he is wrong in his interpretation of evidence - it is an attack on his interpretation of the evidence.

Originally posted by tommyjo
What do you think he will post next? Will it be a Tanker Enemy video or perhaps a video of the chemtrails being generated from the 'rear wing set'?

You know if you'd jsut posted this 31 minutes earlier you could claim to be prescient with some REAL EVIDENCEto support it!!

Originally posted by Stewie
reply to post by tommyjo

 

You are working awfully hard. It must be a thankless job.

And, you call people ignorant. tsk. tsk.

Make yourself useful. Help us to understand what is being "sprayed" There are too many of us. We know something is going on up there that is not normal. Either YOU realize that something is going on, or you don't. If you don't, you are just a roadblock to those of us that do.
If you think everything is normal, why don't you just go away? Why do you work so hard?

Let's talk about the possibilities, not the impossibilities.

Yes ignorant of the upper air routes that exist above them and have done so for decades. How many new posters jump into these threads and claim the old 'X shapes' and criss-cross patterns in the skies? The various threads are littered with them and their images and videos. They do this without conducting their own research after stumbling on closed comment You Tube channels or misleading websites with fake images, etc.

Yes there are too many of you and it just shows that ignorance breeds ignorance in relation to this subject. Now with aviation websites such as Sky Vector, Plane Plotter and Flight Aware many can now do their own research. How many times do you see the post of "I don't live near an airport, or the planes aren't going anywhere?" There is a whole aviation hobby surrounding aircraft plotting and tracking, yet none of you chemtrail believers seem willing to conduct research into it. Why?

TJ

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by tommyjo
What do you think he will post next? Will it be a Tanker Enemy video or perhaps a video of the chemtrails being generated from the 'rear wing set'?

You know if you'd jsut posted this 31 minutes earlier you could claim to be prescient with some REAL EVIDENCEto support it!!

Good grief. Will the madness never end? Has anyone seen Travis McCauley's You Tube Channel? No doubt Travis will not know about the high altitude air routes in his region? I bet if you analyse his BBQ rib sauce it will contain Barium?

TJ

The not-so-secret ingredient: Stadis 450
(dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid, barium salt)

chemtrails.cc...

The most commonly used commercial turbine jet fuels today are named JET-A, JET-A1, and
JET-B. All of these are kerosene type fuels except JET-B which is a kerosene-naphtha blend
for colder climates [1, 2]. JET-A is used internationally and JET-A1 is available only in the US.
The US military primarily uses its own kerosene jet fuel, JP-8, which is similar to JET-A1 [11,
2].
A number of chemical additives are used in these fuels including corrosion inhibitors,
temperature stabilizers, detergents, and static electricity dissipators. Static dissipators are of
particular importance to atmospheric aerosol and environmental research, due to their metal
content and their widespread use in commercial and military jet fuel [17, 8]. Octel Starreon
Stadis® 450 is a static dissipator, comprised of dinonylnapthalene sulfonic acid and other
organic solvents, and according to the product MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet), it
contains two "trade secret" ingredients [18]. Stadis 450 is the only approved anti-static
additive for use in Air Force aviation fuels, including JP-8, JP-5, JET-A1, and JET-B [9].
DuPont, the original manufacturer, reports having divested its production of Stadis 450 in
September of 1994 to Octel Starreon LLC , now a subsidiary of Innospec Fuel Specialties.
Innospec also manufactures another static dissipator additive called Statsafe®. However,
according to Exxon Mobil, Stadis 450 continues to be the static dissipator of choice for
commercial and military aviation [17].
static dissipator additive is widely used in jet kerosene .... Stadis® 450 is the only ...
additive currently manufactured for use in aviation turbine fuels approved by the major
turbine and airframe manufacturers.
Although the "trade secret" ingredients are well protected by the manufacturer, a recent study
contracted by the EPA [10] and other sources strongly imply that these ingredients are salts of
barium and/or calcium. The EPA classifies this dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid, barium salt
as a "HPV" (High Production Volume) chemical, meaning it is "produced or imported into the
United States in quantities of 1 million pounds or more per year [12]." This same study reports
that "Based on the available toxicity results, dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid, barium salt
appears to be the most biologically active member of the [dinonylnaphthalene] category [10]."
It is hypothesized that jet exhaust aerosol [4] is responsible for cloud seeding, rainbow
diffraction, and dichroism observed in persistent contrails [5]. While "skeptics" may dismiss
the very existence of persistent contrails, the phenomenon is widespread and commonly
accepted among atmospheric scientists [7]. The exact cause of aerosol cloud seeding has
been the subject of endless debate, but it has been shown conclusively that the earth's
albedo, or its overall reflectivity, is increased by contrail aerosol (see chemtrails.cc sattelite
imagery category).

Citations
1. www.csgnetwork.com...
2. en.wikipedia.org...
3. GRID-Arendal in collaboration with United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
www.grida.no.../climate/ipcc/aviation/034.htm
4. chemtrails.cc...
5. chemtrails.cc...
6. www.wired.com...
7. www.agu.org...
8. DETAIL SPECIFICATION, TURBINE FUEL, AVIATION, KEROSENE TYPE, JP-8 (NATO
F-34), NATO F-35, and JP-8+100 (NATO F-37) [pdf]. U.S. Army. Downloaded from
www.hnd.usace.army.mil...
9. AEF Fuels Management Pocket Guide [pdf]. U.S. Air Force. Downloaded from
www.aflma.hq.af.mil...
10. High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program Test Plan and Data Review,
Dinonylnaphthalene Category [pdf].
www.epa.gov...
11. www.globalsecurity.org...
12. www.epa.gov...
13. PermitApplicationReports200808-Marathon_Stadis_450.pdf Source:
www.louisvilleky.gov...
B16A640C9D10/0/PermitApplicationReports200808.pdf
14. Hughes Aircraft Company
15. en.wikipedia.org...
16. Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007.
From epw.senate.gov...
17. Exxon Mobil World Jet Fuel Specifications with Avgas Supplement. From:
www.exxonmobilaviation.com...
18. Octel Starreon Stadis 450 MSDS

Project Cloverleaf Pt 1



Project Cloverleaf Pt 2



PURPOSE OF CHEMTRAILS PART 1 of 5

THE AIRCRAFT YOU CAN SEE IS ACTUALLY DUMPING FUEL,
(Asiana Airlines jet, Flight OZ 271, dumps fuel after an engine fire)

THIS IN ITSELF IS HARMFUL AT LOW ALTITUDE, THE VIDEO CLEARLY SHOWS THAT
THE AIRCRAFT IS ADAPTED TO RELEASE FUEL FROM 2 VALVES. THESE VALVES ARE PRESENT ON MOST COMMERCIAL AND MILITARY AIRCRAFT.. THESE VALVES COULD BE FITTED TO SEPERATE TANKS WHICH CONTAIN CHEMICALS ..

NANO-TECHNOLOGY WILL ALLOW FOR AGENTS TO BE MODIFIED TO WITH STAND LOW TEMPERATURES,HIGH TEMPERATURES, TO BE UV STABLE,TO AVOID EVAPORATION ,(PROTECTED IN A COATING) THE DROPLETS WOULD BE SMALL ENOUGH TO FIT SEVERAL HUNDRED ON A PIN HEAD AND ALSO TOLERATE DILUTION BY WATER,THESE DROPLETS CAN BE BREATHED,INGESTED AND COAT ALL SURFACES. THE DESIGN WILL ALLOW THE COATING TO BREAK DOWN OVER DAYS OR WEEKS ALLOWING A SLOW RELEASE. SO THE TECHNOLOGY IS HERE ,